HIV: Hard work is paying off for the top 2 medical affairs teams in Europe. How is your team doing? In the past 6 months, the medical affairs teams for two leading HIV treatments reached up to 91% of the doctors we surveyed—and earned top marks for delivering the services doctors want most. No wonder their overall satisfaction scores are up to one and a half times that of their closest rival. See how your team compares in Medical Affairs Reputations: HIV. You’ll learn how infectious disease specialists rate the teams for 8 major HIV treatments, whether they’re satisfied with your team’s performance, and where your team needs improvement. Plus you’ll see which brands your brand is losing share to, which ones you’re taking it from, and why—information you can use to compete more effectively.
Reasons to Purchase
Answering Key Questions about Medical Affairs Teams for 8 Major HIV Drugs
Celsentri (maraviroc; ViiV Healthcare): Celsentri’s team’s satisfaction scores are far below average in two areas. Which two?
Evotaz (atazanavir/cobicistat; BMS/Gilead): Evotaz’s team and Intelence’s team are equally active. Which one has the higher overall satisfaction score?
Intelence (etravirine; Janssen Cilag): What’s the one area where Intelence’s team earns negative satisfaction scores?
Isentress (raltegravir; Merck, Sharpe & Dohme): Isentress’ team outperforms the leading team in several areas. What are they?
Stribild (elvitegravir/emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/cobicistat; Gilead): Only two teams have no major areas for improvement. Is Stribild’s team one of them?
Triumeq (abacavir/dolutegravir/lamivudine; ViiV Healthcare): In which key area does Triumeq’s team get the second lowest satisfaction scores?
Truvada (emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate; Gilead): Which team earns higher satisfaction scores for responding promptly to inquiries, Truvada’s or Intelence’s?
Viread (tenofovir disoproxil fumarate; Gilead): Which team’s overall satisfaction score is nearly double Viread’s?
Top 2 brands have a commanding lead: Their teams’ overall quality scores are significantly higher than the rest. The same two brands have the leading teams in the US market as well.
Activity pays off: Teams that interact more with doctors tend to have higher overall quality scores. The two leading teams have the most interactions by far.
Trials and programmes are important: While information provision services tend to rank highest, services related to clinical trials and non-promotional programmes are also important.
Doctors prefer face to face: In-person interaction types rank higher than other methods. Even the most popular type of electronic interaction is preferred by less than 50% of doctors.
Teams performing well: Performance scores for nearly every team covered are at least moderately high—and highest in the areas important to doctors.
Satisfaction varies: Scores range from neutral to high, but the same three teams tend to score highest in almost every area.
Clear areas for improvement: Most teams need to improve satisfaction in one or two of the seven medical affairs services most important to doctors.
European doctors more likely to prefer frequent interactions: 50% of EU5 doctors prefer to interact with medical affairs teams more than once per quarter compared to 40% in the US.
Attitude problems: From better scheduling to spending less time on marketing, doctors identified four separate ways medical affairs teams can improve their “attitude.”
An Expert-designed Competitive View of Your Medical Affairs Team Developed with the help of medical affairs specialists, this report gives you an in-depth comparison of 8 medical affairs teams—answering important questions like: What do oncologists need?
How, and how often are they using your medical affairs team?
What services do they consider most important?
How often should you contact them? What channels are best?
Does your medical affairs team deliver?
How memorable are your team’s interactions with oncologists?
How do oncologists rank your team for performance and satisfaction in 12 key areas?
How does your team compare to the competition—in each area, and overall?
What needs improvement?
Are you delivering the services that are most important to oncologists?
Where do you need to improve?
How can your team enhance its services?
Based on Interviews with Practicing Oncologists
We surveyed 150 infectious disease specialists—30 from each EU5 country (France, Italy, Germany, Spain, UK), chosen from the largest community of validated physicians in the world.
Have been practicing for between 3 and 35 years
See at least 5 patients with NSCLC in a typical month
Devote at least 50% of their time to direct patient care
Have interacted with at least one listed product’s medical affairs team in the last 6 months.
We conducted the survey between April 12th and April 26th, 2016. About FirstWord
FirstWord is an innovative industry intelligence leader serving over 240,000 Pharma and MedTech professionals worldwide. FirstWord offers a range of products and services designed to help your company gain a competitive edge by making key business decisions with speed and confidence.
FirstWord Pharma PLUS is a personalised and comprehensive intelligence service delivering up-to-the-minute pharma news, insight, analysis and expert views of importance to your company’s success.
FirstWord Reports deliver timely, need-to-know intelligence about your products, your competitors and your markets. Covering biosimilars, market access, medical affairs, sales & marketing, technology and therapy areas, FirstWord Reports provide expert views and intelligence on the challenges facing pharma today.